On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 08:28:38 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:

eg: LR Disco 14'10" x 5'11"
Ford Mondeo 15' 5" x 5'11"
Merc E series 15' 9" x 6' 5" A foot longer and 6" wider!!!

The latter being very much the "City executive's car of choice")

Quite, and things like Suzuki Jimnys and, indeed, that tiny Fiat (I
think) 4x4 car are not anything like as big, nor for that matter is my
88" Land Rover, which is about the length of your typical small hatch
(hardly a Chelsea tractor, mind, more a normal tractor!)

And, no, I don't drive it, or indeed anything else, in London, or not
with any frequency. The public transport is such that it is
unnecessary unless you need to carry a number of large or heavy items.
I have driven into central London precisely once (for the latter
reason) and I have no desire to repeat the experience.

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

Neil Williams wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 08:28:38 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:


eg: LR Disco 14'10" x 5'11"
Ford Mondeo 15' 5" x 5'11"
Merc E series 15' 9" x 6' 5" A foot longer and 6" wider!!!

The latter being very much the "City executive's car of choice")


Quite, and things like Suzuki Jimnys and, indeed, that tiny Fiat (I
think) 4x4 car are not anything like as big, nor for that matter is my
88" Land Rover, which is about the length of your typical small hatch
(hardly a Chelsea tractor, mind, more a normal tractor!)

One also has to bear in mind *road space* rather than the space
physically occupied by the car. As a typical 4x4 is quite a bit taller
than a "normal" car, it reduces visibility for the car behind it, so the
car behind must keep more distance in order to retain visibility.

And, no, I don't drive it, or indeed anything else, in London, or not
with any frequency. The public transport is such that it is
unnecessary unless you need to carry a number of large or heavy items.
I have driven into central London precisely once (for the latter
reason) and I have no desire to repeat the experience.

I would say that in central London, in non-equipment cases, a Travelcard
is superior to a car for flexibility, price and convenience.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

In message , at 13:44:21 on Tue, 15 Feb
2005, Dave Arquati remarked:
Neil Williams wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 08:28:38 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:

eg: LR Disco 14'10" x 5'11"
Ford Mondeo 15' 5" x 5'11"
Merc E series 15' 9" x 6' 5" A foot longer and 6" wider!!!

The latter being very much the "City executive's car of choice")
Quite, and things like Suzuki Jimnys and, indeed, that tiny Fiat (I
think) 4x4 car are not anything like as big, nor for that matter is my
88" Land Rover, which is about the length of your typical small hatch
(hardly a Chelsea tractor, mind, more a normal tractor!)

One also has to bear in mind *road space* rather than the space
physically occupied by the car. As a typical 4x4 is quite a bit taller
than a "normal" car, it reduces visibility for the car behind it, so
the car behind must keep more distance in order to retain visibility.

And you've seen this happening in practice?

And, no, I don't drive it, or indeed anything else, in London, or not
with any frequency. The public transport is such that it is
unnecessary unless you need to carry a number of large or heavy items.
I have driven into central London precisely once (for the latter
reason) and I have no desire to repeat the experience.

I would say that in central London, in non-equipment cases, a
Travelcard is superior to a car for flexibility, price and convenience.

I agree, for my lifestyle. But we were talking about the tiny minority
who find the reverse to be true.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 13:44:21 on Tue, 15 Feb
2005, Dave Arquati remarked:

Neil Williams wrote:

On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 08:28:38 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:

eg: LR Disco 14'10" x 5'11"
Ford Mondeo 15' 5" x 5'11"
Merc E series 15' 9" x 6' 5" A foot longer and 6" wider!!!

The latter being very much the "City executive's car of choice")

Quite, and things like Suzuki Jimnys and, indeed, that tiny Fiat (I
think) 4x4 car are not anything like as big, nor for that matter is my
88" Land Rover, which is about the length of your typical small hatch
(hardly a Chelsea tractor, mind, more a normal tractor!)

One also has to bear in mind *road space* rather than the space
physically occupied by the car. As a typical 4x4 is quite a bit taller
than a "normal" car, it reduces visibility for the car behind it, so
the car behind must keep more distance in order to retain visibility.

And you've seen this happening in practice?

From personal experience outside London. I can't see why it would be
any different in London, and I know that one major claim used against
4x4s is that they make life more difficult for other motorists.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 13:44:21 +0000, Dave Arquati
wrote:

One also has to bear in mind *road space* rather than the space
physically occupied by the car. As a typical 4x4 is quite a bit taller
than a "normal" car, it reduces visibility for the car behind it, so the
car behind must keep more distance in order to retain visibility.

I'm not so sure that's an issue unless you tend to look at the road
ahead "through" other cars. Then again, I've always preferred tall
cars because of the extra space they tend to give (I'm 6'4" and fairly
heavily built so I need it!) so I'm more used to looking over than
through.

I would say that in central London, in non-equipment cases, a Travelcard
is superior to a car for flexibility, price and convenience.

Absolutely.

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.